2012 Team Kits

frenchfighter

Doobz wrote:

Awesome pic frenchie.. Will be interesting to see the launch on the 18th

http://www.p5simplyfaster.com/

Here it is not cut off by this site:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GD6Zx5by5g4/T ... 00/pc5.jpg

And a cpl more shots:

frenchfighter

Any excuse to post this smashing kit

EKIMIKE

frenchfighter wrote:

Cervelo PC5. Not sure if any team is using this though.

Maybe it's just the light but the downtube/toptube(seems strange just writing that) junction looks odd. Can't imagine this is UCI legal. Probably as above, for the triathletes. Looks damn fast, but can't say it particularly appeals to me in the looks department.

frenchfighter

Definitely triathlete :shock:



http://www.bikerumor.com/2012/01/15/spy ... 5-spotted/

rozzer32

I think they are bringing out a Tri version and a TT version like Spesh have done with the Shiv.

greasedscotsman

frenchfighter wrote:

Definitely triathlete :shock:



http://www.bikerumor.com/2012/01/15/spy ... 5-spotted/

Front brake is different on that one.

pat1cp

According to Inrng they're using hydraulic brakes... Unless I read it wrong.

EKIMIKE

Almost certain the rear is hydraulic. Not sure about the front. I think this is the missing link with Magura appearing as a sponsor on Garmin-Barracuda kit. But considering this is UCI illegal it still doesn't make a huge amount of sense. Unless they start with hydraulic brakes on the road bike or the P4, orrrr they're releasing two types of P5 (but that's unlikely).

Gazzaputt

frenchfighter wrote:

Any excuse to post this smashing kit

For once I agree with FF! Best kit and I'd love to lay my hands on a Canyon with that colour scheme.

bigmat

Gazzaputt wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

Any excuse to post this smashing kit

For once I agree with FF! Best kit and I'd love to lay my hands on a Canyon with that colour scheme.

You should ride with Dulwich Paragon if you like that kit!

frenchfighter

Someone saying a spesh helmet for Cav

shinyhelmut

Back to the P5, it's official;

http://p5simplyfaster.com/

http://www.slowtwitch.com/News/The_Cervelo_P5_unveiled_2538.html

I'm just off out to buy a lottery ticket....

greasedscotsman

Water bottle seems a bit crude if you compare to the Spesh Shiv which has a bladder inside the frame.

rozzer32

greasedscotsman wrote:

Water bottle seems a bit crude if you compare to the Spesh Shiv which has a bladder inside the frame.

Apparently it saves 4 watts of power though. I know this is only a small amount and was found it a wind tunnel which isn't quite the same as real world blah blah but it's still 4 watts.

Gazzaputt

BigMat wrote:

Gazzaputt wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

Any excuse to post this smashing kit

For once I agree with FF! Best kit and I'd love to lay my hands on a Canyon with that colour scheme.

You should ride with Dulwich Paragon if you like that kit!

Agree Dulwich kit is lovely bit I'm committed Bigfoot member.

bigmat

Gazzaputt wrote:

BigMat wrote:

Gazzaputt wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

Any excuse to post this smashing kit

For once I agree with FF! Best kit and I'd love to lay my hands on a Canyon with that colour scheme.

You should ride with Dulwich Paragon if you like that kit!

Agree Dulwich kit is lovely bit I'm committed Bigfoot member.

I knew that, hence the

frenchfighter

Getty

DavidJB

rozzer32 wrote:

greasedscotsman wrote:

Water bottle seems a bit crude if you compare to the Spesh Shiv which has a bladder inside the frame.

Apparently it saves 4 watts of power though. I know this is only a small amount and was found it a wind tunnel which isn't quite the same as real world blah blah but it's still 4 watts.

They need another one of those near the saddle so you don't have to stop to piss

yourpaceormine

greasedscotsman wrote:

Water bottle seems a bit crude if you compare to the Spesh Shiv which has a bladder inside the frame.

Thought the UCI were lokking at water bottles - i.e. stopping things like this. Or is it more a case of the UCI are thinking about something, but haven't actually done anything yet (that phrase sort of sounds familiar doesn't it when used in conjunction with 'UCI')

shinyhelmut

That shiv model is the tri-specific one hence non UCI compliant. The P5, like the Trek speed concept, is UCI compliant but has various add-ons which can be added to improve the aerodynamics if you don't care what the UCI think.

greasedscotsman

ShinyHelmut wrote:

That shiv model is the tri-specific one hence non UCI compliant. The P5, like the Trek speed concept, is UCI compliant but has various add-ons which can be added to improve the aerodynamics if you don't care what the UCI think.

Like this?

shinyhelmut

Well similar but not quite as extreme

takethehighroad

ShinyHelmut wrote:

That shiv model is the tri-specific one hence non UCI compliant. The P5, like the Trek speed concept, is UCI compliant but has various add-ons which can be added to improve the aerodynamics if you don't care what the UCI think.

And people say cyclists are geeks?

shinyhelmut

<- Proudly a cyclist, triathlete and geek

Doobz

:shock: :shock:

Pokerface

ShinyHelmut wrote:

That shiv model is the tri-specific one hence non UCI compliant. The P5, like the Trek speed concept, is UCI compliant but has various add-ons which can be added to improve the aerodynamics if you don't care what the UCI think.

That's not entirely accurate. The P5 does come in two different configurations, but the only real difference is the front fork. The Tri version has a much bigger bladed fork which hides the hydraulic brakes. The TT version has a thinner fork with the brakes on the outside. Otherwise the frames are the same.

Cervelo uses a loophole in the 3:1 rule in o rider to get the massive bladed areas around the rear stays.

patchy

Pokerface wrote:

ShinyHelmut wrote:

That shiv model is the tri-specific one hence non UCI compliant. The P5, like the Trek speed concept, is UCI compliant but has various add-ons which can be added to improve the aerodynamics if you don't care what the UCI think.

That's not entirely accurate. The P5 does come in two different configurations, but the only real difference is the front fork. The Tri version has a much bigger bladed fork which hides the hydraulic brakes. The TT version has a thinner fork with the brakes on the outside. Otherwise the frames are the same.

Cervelo uses a loophole in the 3:1 rule in o rider to get the massive bladed areas around the rear stays.

Are the hydraulic brakes UCI legal?

rozzer32

patchy wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

ShinyHelmut wrote:

That shiv model is the tri-specific one hence non UCI compliant. The P5, like the Trek speed concept, is UCI compliant but has various add-ons which can be added to improve the aerodynamics if you don't care what the UCI think.

That's not entirely accurate. The P5 does come in two different configurations, but the only real difference is the front fork. The Tri version has a much bigger bladed fork which hides the hydraulic brakes. The TT version has a thinner fork with the brakes on the outside. Otherwise the frames are the same.

Cervelo uses a loophole in the 3:1 rule in o rider to get the massive bladed areas around the rear stays.

Are the hydraulic brakes UCI legal?

Yup, they ain't discs.

Pokerface

Yes - as Rozzer says - they are legal. They are just hydraulic rim brakes - not disc brakes. Actually lighter than standard brakes and work better. Could be the way forward, depending on how easy they are to maintain, etc.

patchy

Cool, useful to know - for some reason I thought they were banned. Probably getting confused with disc brakes (or assuming that UCI just sees innovation and stamps on it straightaway).